Gunnar Lassinantti

The Olof Palme International Center of Stockholm

Address at the III NGO-Forum of the Baltic Sea Region in Turku on May 9, 2003.

The Scandinavian Model – The Swedish Model.

The roots of the Swedish NGO model go back as far as the 1830s. The first popular movements to emerge were the free churches and the temperance movement, the latter of which directed its attention at the extensive alcohol abuse that existed at the time. Members of popular movements learned how to organise and agitate.

The first popular movements united with the new political ideologies that were emerging in Europe, such as liberalism and socialism, and gradually paved the way for new popular movements. United we Stand Divided we Fall was the motto around which The Women's Liberation Movement, The Trade Union Movement, The Cooperative Movement, adult educational movements, sports movements, The Farmers' Movement, The Salaried Employees' Movement, youth and children’s organisations, The Peace Movement, The Pensioners’ Movement, The Disabled Persons’ Movement, The People’s Halls Movement, The Environmental Movement, immigrant organisations and a considerable number of other movements and organisations for common interests such as chess clubs and church sewing circles were formed.

Today’s historical NGO model is made up of a broad spectrum of popular movements. Some are affiliated to political parties but the majority are not. Affiliated popular movements such as the Trade Union Movement, the political Labour Movement and the Farmers’ Movement see political affiliation as a way of meeting their needs through a closer dialogue and by being able to influence legislation and budget issues.

Democracy was achieved later in Sweden than in many other comparable countries. Women were not given equal voting rights until 1921. Democracy has been carried forward by active popular movements that operate a bottom upward model (not controlled from the top as with the communist model) and which have engaged millions of members first, and foremost from local levels.

The economic support provided by members’ fees and public funding enables popular movements to organise unemployment benefit funds, housing services, youth clubs, study circles etc. and allows them to exert a democratic influence locally, regionally and centrally through decisions passed at their meetings and congresses. Add to this the Cooperative Movement, which represents a form of joint ownership as an alternative to private enterprise and public ownership.

Public funding to NGOs is not all embracing but is targeted to specific areas such as unemployment, youth activities and adult education. Political parties also receive support per mandate in various decision-making bodies, which defenders of the system claim makes them less susceptible to economic pressure groups.

The Social Democratic Party has been in power in Sweden, alone or in coalition, for 62 of the past 71 years. This is unique in the world and has naturally given the Swedish popular movement model a special profile. One important example is the close relationship between the Social Democratic Party and the Trade Union Movement, which, among other things, has given the Trade Union Movement the right to organise unemployment benefit funds. Another example is the strong position of housing cooperatives on the housing market and prominent adult education organisations such as The Workers' Educational Association (ABF) who lead the way in providing general education and arts courses.

Another central concept is the Nordic model or the Nordic welfare model, which is characterised by decentralisation and openness in the public decision-making process through municipal autonomy based on the power of taxation and the principle of public access to official records which guarantees the public the right to view public documents. The welfare model covers the public in general and provides decentralised health and mental care, education and unemployment and social benefits.

The welfare model is deeply rooted in Nordic society. At the recent general elections in Sweden and Finland, the conservative parties lost a considerable number of votes due to their demand for large tax cuts. The Swedish and Finnish electorate are willing to pay higher taxes for a higher standard of welfare. In Sweden, discontentment is brewing over the government’s failure to improve health, parental and unemployment benefits as promised in their election manifesto. The government blames the downward trend in the economic situation.

One objective has been to create a model through the popular movements that broadens the participation in community activities within the working class, and among low-income earners and people with various forms of social disability. Gender and ethnic dimensions have been added to this objective during recent years.

The number of women elected as representatives in various decision-making bodies has greatly increased. At the opening of parliament following the general election last October, Prime Minister Göran Persson proudly proclaimed: “Sweden has the most gender equal parliament in the world!” The increased influence of women has left its mark on legislation but women still have a lower average wage for the same work as men.

Sweden has always had a certain amount of immigration, but emigration has been greater since World War II. There was an extensive influx of foreign labour from Finland and southern Europe during the 1960s and 70s due to a great shortage of labour within the Swedish export industry and hospitals in southern and central Sweden. The five Nordic countries have had a joint labour agreement since the mid 1950s.

Immigration during recent times has mainly involved refugees and close relatives and very little foreign labour. This has brought with it a new cultural element due to most of the immigrants being Iranian, Iraqi, Kurdish and Bosnian Muslims.

Generally speaking Sweden has not succeeded in integrating the new immigrants into working life and the community as well as with previous immigrants. An integration policy is high on the government list of priorities for the coming years.

Sweden has been a member of the European Union since 1995 and has adapted its policies and laws to suit the EU in most areas, including refugee and asylum policies.

The old Swedish and Nordic popular movement model described above is facing new challenges and problems. Critics claim that popular movements are stuck in a rut of old working methods. Member involvement has in most cases decreased and activities are being taken over by paid officials. There are fewer and fewer new members, especially among young people. This was highlighted in a recent study on popular movements in Sweden.

There is less public funding for popular movements and they have to look into other methods of financing. Some organisations refuse in principle to accept financial support from authorities saying they want to be fully independent. Most organisations accept financial support whenever possible on condition that the authorities do not meddle in their internal affairs. Many popular movements have been forced to improve their own fund-raising efforts through telemarketing and fund-raising campaigns etc.

Sweden is one of the countries that contribute more than 0.7% of their gross national product to development assistance. To be exact, 0.74% in 2002 or SEK 16.5 thousand million, about 2 thousand million Euro. Around 10% of the bilateral support of SEK 9.5 thousand million are earmarked funds that are channelled through non-governmental organisations to support democracy, human rights, humanitarian aid etc. in developing countries, Eastern and Central Europe and the Balkans. The Swedish International Development Cooperation Agency (Sida) signs agreements with umbrella organisations such as The Olof Palme International Center, the Ecumenical Council and Forum Syd, who in their turn coordinate development cooperation activities for a large number of organisations. For more long-term projects, government funding is available for up to 80% of the total costs, which could be increased to 100% for certain types of acute projects.

When I first took part in the European Nuclear Disarmament Movement (END) more than 20 years ago, it struck me that action-oriented activities in other parts of Europe were to a great extent built around individual issues and leading personalities and not on a broader commitment within popular movements as I was used to.

The civil society movements that emerged through self-organisation during the resistance struggle and which further progressed in developing countries and the former communist Eastern and Central Europe have a different historical background. The same concerns the new social movements that attract younger people, such as the Attac movement, which are opposed to the injustices of globalisation, the ever increasing social disparities, environmental pollution and the US claim on world domination, human rights and international law.

The improvement in information technology during the globalisation era has enabled the new social movements to organise on an international basis. This was evident at the World Social Forum in Porto Alegre, Brazil a few months ago.

The old popular movements have not found a way of communicating with the new social movements. In Sweden for instance, the Trade Union Movement and the Church are anxious to create a dialogue because they know that many of their members are active in, or sympathise with, the new alternative movements. The Swedish “establishment” has been somewhat hesitant since the riots caused by alternative events at the EU summit meeting in Gothenburg in 2001. Investigations into the riots have placed most of the responsibility for the events in Gothenburg on the police force.

How future NGO models are shaped in Sweden will, in my opinion, greatly depend on how the dialogue is improved between the political system, the old popular movements and the new social movements. It is not possible to predict the final solution only to have an opinion about in which direction it is all heading. Some organisations will prefer doing it their way. Myself, I believe that both movements can be revitalised and have a lot to gain from extending and improving their relationship. And that is an answer I assume you expect from a person with several decades of involvement in the ideology and organisation of Swedish social democracy.

Thank you ladies and gentlemen.